Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-05-17-Speech-1-136"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100517.17.1-136"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, before speaking, may I be allowed to join in the grief that this Chamber has already expressed for the death of the two European soldiers killed this morning in Afghanistan, following a terrorist attack.
Since the question of safety has already been dealt with in the ad hoc standard on toys, our worry is that this additional burden on manufacturers risks becoming disproportionate. With regard to the request to examine other labelling options for textile and clothing products, I am committed to setting up a wide-ranging and open debate with interested parties on all the other issues that have been raised during discussions in the European Parliament and the Council.
I thank you for your attention, and will listen carefully to your comments during this debate.
Ladies and gentlemen, the Commission has begun to revise standards on textile names, as part of the ‘Better Regulation’ campaign. The main aim of this proposal is to improve the existing legal framework, and to simplify the procedure for adopting new textile names. The proposal therefore aims to promote innovation within the textile sector.
The aim of the new regulation is therefore to allow manufacturers, users and consumers quicker access to innovative products containing new fibres; a subject close to the hearts of European consumers, sector enterprises – including both textile and clothing businesses – and also national administrations.
I would like firstly to thank the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection for approving the report on 8 April. I would particularly like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Manders, and the shadow rapporteurs, for their in-depth and detailed work on this proposal, which has sparked such a lively and constructive debate on the labelling of textile products. Since this is a proposal to simplify the law, the Commission strayed from the provisions laid down by the directive in its original text, which must now be replaced by the regulation under discussion.
This said, the Commission agrees with the vast majority of the amendments proposed in the report adopted by the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection. We are aware that some amendments, especially those that propose widening the scope of the regulation, will be subject to Council discussion. We will do our best to facilitate the debate between institutions, and will work hard to achieve acceptable compromises.
One of these amendments concerns the origin marking, the ‘made in’ label, which was not covered by the Commission’s initial proposal: Parliament has always actively devoted great attention to this matter, which is of such great importance for consumers.
The amendments proposed in this area relate to the proposal tabled in 2005 by the Commission, concerning the origin marking of many important product categories, including textile products. I will support these amendments, as I have already emphasised during a meeting with the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection. I will adopt the same approach for the amendment that proposes labelling non-textile parts of animal origin.
I would also like to make some observations about other amendments. With regard to Amendment 19, the Commission’s proposal had already established that traditional tailors were exempt from labelling. Extending this exemption to all textile products offered to consumers as one-off products would, however, mean that an arguably excessive number of clothing products would be exempt from labelling. This sector effectively represents one of the main lines of development for European clothing products. Such products would thus be exempt from labelling, and the number of exemptions could risk becoming excessive.
Regarding Amendment 63, which aims to remove toys from the list of products excluded from the obligation of labelling, I would like to remind you that the key issue as far as toys are concerned is safety. The relevant standard is sufficiently detailed and was re-examined in depth in 2009, with extended debates within the Council and the European Parliament."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples